"Default" Math Vs "Legacy"?

He/she must think he/she is on R/Metrology

It leaks over into other fields. I am a Beckoff (like the Pc-Dmis of Controls) person and I've met a couple RockWell fellers... yep DIEHARD ALRIGHT!

Dude, Cumofogabriel... Take a chill pill.
This is a COMMUNITY forum. The intent here is to ask for help, with respect, and a community of peers will offer logical productive no-drama solutions.

--Yes some folks from Hexagon are also on here, but with the attitude you are putting forth....
This niche industry seems to be very capable of red-flagging inappropriate unprofessional, or simply non-productive behaviors of people.
it's just a matter of time if you keep this demeanor. Not a threat, but a word of caution.

​

Thanks for making that point louisd and well said. As you point out, part of this forums key guidelines are...

Show Courtesy and Respect to the Other Members​
Respect the Hexagon Metrology Staff and It's Appointed Moderators​
and Don’t Talk Yourself (or Others) Down​

I would say the OP has violated all three and we would be well with our rights to ban them - it almost seems like they are asking to be banned. However, I have so far resisted that urge and tried to rise above the petty point scoring, choosing instead to focus on the more productive comments many of the other users have made in this thread and I thank them all for their professionalism. As you say, this is predominantly a community forum where like minded users can reach out for help / hold discussions on the complex subject of CMM programming that others at their workplace may not fully understand. I must also point out that although

some folks from Hexagon are also on here

​, those of us that do post are under no obligation to do so. We are here, like many other PC-DMIS users, because we feel passionately about what we do and the software we use and want to share our knowledge and expertise and to offer help to those who need it.

In answer to SingularitY, Matthew D. Hoedeman and vpt.se 's valid question about the removal of datum shift information and it's potential reinstatement...

The datum shift information was removed because the primary question to our tech support teams in relation to that subject was "how do I turn it off"? As you have all pointed out, this was more to do with the majority of people not understanding it's intent or how it is supposed to work than anything else. To vpt.se's point, yes, we are paying attention to the ideas centre voting and are already discussing how we could present datum shift information in a concise and meaningful way for the geometric tolerance command. We are also thinking of including an in-depth explanation of datum shift as part of this years Hex Live event.

what's your suggested alternative?

​

In answer to SingularitY, Matthew D. Hoedeman and vpt.se 's valid question about the removal of datum shift information and it's potential reinstatement...

The datum shift information was removed because the primary question to our tech support teams in relation to that subject was "how do I turn it off"? As you have all pointed out, this was more to do with the majority of people not understanding it's intent or how it is supposed to work than anything else. To vpt.se's point, yes, we are paying attention to the ideas centre voting and are already discussing how we could present datum shift information in a concise and meaningful way for the geometric tolerance command. We are also thinking of including an in-depth explanation of datum shift as part of this years Hex Live event.

It'd be great to have this back, especially for the ones that understand it. Is there anyway to extract that "hidden" data until you guys turn it back on?

Unfortunately, no, it is not currently available.

​

Thanks for making that point louisd and well said. As you point out, part of this forums key guidelines are...

Show Courtesy and Respect to the Other Members​
Respect the Hexagon Metrology Staff and It's Appointed Moderators​
and Don’t Talk Yourself (or Others) Down​

I would say the OP has violated all three and we would be well with our rights to ban them - it almost seems like they are asking to be banned. ...

When I read the original post I don't see the items you mentioned in your list. There are no forum members mentioned at all. There are no moderators mentioned at all. The third item in your list talks about people and not products which is clear the original poster has issues with some aspects of PC-DMIS. If those are reasons to be banned I don't see how it would fit in this case.

It is clear the original poster made mistakes. Why not just state that and move on.

The one thing the original poster did mention was "...reports coming out with perfect true position..." which is something real that can, and has, happened. In retrospect it is clear that PC-DMIS was applying datum shifts unique for each reported dimension which is both wrong and not understood at that time by most novice users. I know the newer versions of PC-DMIS has improved the reliability of reported dimensions so things like this are less likely to happen if used properly. The Simultaneous Evaluation command should have been the solution to this kind of problem but it only recently was revamped and it didn't work properly in the past so that really wasn't an option back then. I am respectfully pointing this out because I think you are being a little hard on the original poster. Yes, he could have been more tactful.

Bonus on threaded holes are inconvenient, as an inspector, but if the designer wants to predict if a fastener can get started, rather than how it ends up in final torqued state, an MMC on threads is far from useless.

Im old enough to remember a time around Aug of 2006 being in a hexagon training class and having the instructor tell us that "Xact measure is 100% to the standard and we should stop using legacy" we just "upgraded" from 3.5 MR2 to 4.0. I still use legacy to double check xact and geotol when addressing our machinist questions with the same caveat that Singularity mentioned.

V4.0 was the worst release on the planet! I'd go higher if you possibly can.